Hello all,
On a fully up-to-date Rawhide system you need the following line added
to the policy/test_ibpkey.te file to get a clean run of the
selinux-testsuite:
allow test_ibpkey_access_t self:capability { ipc_lock };
The breakage doesn't appear to be due to a kernel change (previously
working kernels now fail), or a Fedora Rawhide policy change (nothing
relevant changed since the last clean run), but I did notice that my
libibverbs package was updated just prior to the breakage. I haven't
had the time to dig into the library code, but I expect that to be the
source of the problem.
--
paul moore
http://www.paul-moore.com
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:35 PM Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> On a fully up-to-date Rawhide system you need the following line added
> to the policy/test_ibpkey.te file to get a clean run of the
> selinux-testsuite:
>
> allow test_ibpkey_access_t self:capability { ipc_lock };
>
> The breakage doesn't appear to be due to a kernel change (previously
> working kernels now fail), or a Fedora Rawhide policy change (nothing
> relevant changed since the last clean run), but I did notice that my
> libibverbs package was updated just prior to the breakage. I haven't
> had the time to dig into the library code, but I expect that to be the
> source of the problem.
Just to be clear, I don't believe this breakage is limited to the test
suite, I expect any users of the SELinux IB hooks will run into this
problem. I believe we need to update the upstream and distro
policies.
--
paul moore
http://www.paul-moore.com
On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 4:58 PM Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:35 PM Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > On a fully up-to-date Rawhide system you need the following line added
> > to the policy/test_ibpkey.te file to get a clean run of the
> > selinux-testsuite:
> >
> > allow test_ibpkey_access_t self:capability { ipc_lock };
> >
> > The breakage doesn't appear to be due to a kernel change (previously
> > working kernels now fail), or a Fedora Rawhide policy change (nothing
> > relevant changed since the last clean run), but I did notice that my
> > libibverbs package was updated just prior to the breakage. I haven't
> > had the time to dig into the library code, but I expect that to be the
> > source of the problem.
>
> Just to be clear, I don't believe this breakage is limited to the test
> suite, I expect any users of the SELinux IB hooks will run into this
> problem. I believe we need to update the upstream and distro
> policies.
A ping to bring this issue back to the top of the mailing list.
--
paul moore
http://www.paul-moore.com
On 8/27/2019 12:24 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 4:58 PM Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:35 PM Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> On a fully up-to-date Rawhide system you need the following line added
>>> to the policy/test_ibpkey.te file to get a clean run of the
>>> selinux-testsuite:
>>>
>>> allow test_ibpkey_access_t self:capability { ipc_lock };
>>>
>>> The breakage doesn't appear to be due to a kernel change (previously
>>> working kernels now fail), or a Fedora Rawhide policy change (nothing
>>> relevant changed since the last clean run), but I did notice that my
>>> libibverbs package was updated just prior to the breakage. I haven't
>>> had the time to dig into the library code, but I expect that to be the
>>> source of the problem.
>> Just to be clear, I don't believe this breakage is limited to the test
>> suite, I expect any users of the SELinux IB hooks will run into this
>> problem. I believe we need to update the upstream and distro
>> policies.
> A ping to bring this issue back to the top of the mailing list.
Hi Paul, I looked in the libraries and don't see explicit use of mlock. Maybe there was a change to use that access control for get_user_pages? That doesn't really jive with previously working kernels no longer working though.
> --
> paul moore
> http://www.paul-moore.com
On 9/3/19 10:30 AM, Daniel Jurgens wrote:
>
> On 8/27/2019 12:24 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 4:58 PM Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:35 PM Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> On a fully up-to-date Rawhide system you need the following line added
>>>> to the policy/test_ibpkey.te file to get a clean run of the
>>>> selinux-testsuite:
>>>>
>>>> allow test_ibpkey_access_t self:capability { ipc_lock };
>>>>
>>>> The breakage doesn't appear to be due to a kernel change (previously
>>>> working kernels now fail), or a Fedora Rawhide policy change (nothing
>>>> relevant changed since the last clean run), but I did notice that my
>>>> libibverbs package was updated just prior to the breakage. I haven't
>>>> had the time to dig into the library code, but I expect that to be the
>>>> source of the problem.
>>> Just to be clear, I don't believe this breakage is limited to the test
>>> suite, I expect any users of the SELinux IB hooks will run into this
>>> problem. I believe we need to update the upstream and distro
>>> policies.
>> A ping to bring this issue back to the top of the mailing list.
>
> Hi Paul, I looked in the libraries and don't see explicit use of mlock. Maybe there was a change to use that access control for get_user_pages? That doesn't really jive with previously working kernels no longer working though.
It would be useful to see the audit messages for that ipc_lock denial,
including the SYSCALL record.
There are a number of kernel operations that can trigger ipc_lock checks,
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/ident/CAP_IPC_LOCK
Several of those are infiniband-specific.
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 10:45 AM Stephen Smalley <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 9/3/19 10:30 AM, Daniel Jurgens wrote:
> >
> > On 8/27/2019 12:24 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> >> On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 4:58 PM Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:35 PM Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>> Hello all,
> >>>>
> >>>> On a fully up-to-date Rawhide system you need the following line added
> >>>> to the policy/test_ibpkey.te file to get a clean run of the
> >>>> selinux-testsuite:
> >>>>
> >>>> allow test_ibpkey_access_t self:capability { ipc_lock };
> >>>>
> >>>> The breakage doesn't appear to be due to a kernel change (previously
> >>>> working kernels now fail), or a Fedora Rawhide policy change (nothing
> >>>> relevant changed since the last clean run), but I did notice that my
> >>>> libibverbs package was updated just prior to the breakage. I haven't
> >>>> had the time to dig into the library code, but I expect that to be the
> >>>> source of the problem.
> >>> Just to be clear, I don't believe this breakage is limited to the test
> >>> suite, I expect any users of the SELinux IB hooks will run into this
> >>> problem. I believe we need to update the upstream and distro
> >>> policies.
> >> A ping to bring this issue back to the top of the mailing list.
> >
> > Hi Paul, I looked in the libraries and don't see explicit use of mlock. Maybe there was a change to use that access control for get_user_pages? That doesn't really jive with previously working kernels no longer working though.
>
> It would be useful to see the audit messages for that ipc_lock denial,
> including the SYSCALL record.
>
> There are a number of kernel operations that can trigger ipc_lock checks,
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/ident/CAP_IPC_LOCK
>
> Several of those are infiniband-specific.
Hi all,
Sorry for the delay in responding. Here is what I see when running
the infiniband_pkey test on a current Fedora Rawhide system (run
individually to capture the output):
1..4
# Running under perl version 5.030000 for linux
# Current time local: Wed Sep 4 18:24:39 2019
# Current time GMT: Wed Sep 4 22:24:39 2019
# Using Test.pm version 1.31
ok 1
Unable to create cq.
not ok 2
# Test 2 got: "256" (./test at line 50)
# Expected: "0"
# ./test line 50 is: ok( $result, 0 );
Unable to create cq.
not ok 3
# Test 3 got: "1" (./test at line 71)
# Expected: "13"
# ./test line 71 is: if (@unlabeled_pkeys) {
ok 4
... and I see the following AVCs:
type=AVC msg=audit(1567635879.312:15018): avc: denied { ipc_lock } for
pid=15726 comm="create_modify_q" capability=14
scontext=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:test_ibpkey_access_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
tcontext=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:test_ibpkey_access_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
tclass=capability permissive=0
type=AVC msg=audit(1567635884.022:15020): avc: denied { ipc_lock } for
pid=15732 comm="create_modify_q" capability=14
scontext=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:test_ibpkey_access_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
tcontext=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:test_ibpkey_access_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
tclass=capability permissive=0
If I apply the workaround patch I mentioned earlier, the test succeeds
and the only AVC is a infiniband_pkey:access denial (which is expected
given the test).
--
paul moore
http://www.paul-moore.com
On 9/4/19 6:32 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 10:45 AM Stephen Smalley <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 9/3/19 10:30 AM, Daniel Jurgens wrote:
>>>
>>> On 8/27/2019 12:24 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 4:58 PM Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:35 PM Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On a fully up-to-date Rawhide system you need the following line added
>>>>>> to the policy/test_ibpkey.te file to get a clean run of the
>>>>>> selinux-testsuite:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> allow test_ibpkey_access_t self:capability { ipc_lock };
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The breakage doesn't appear to be due to a kernel change (previously
>>>>>> working kernels now fail), or a Fedora Rawhide policy change (nothing
>>>>>> relevant changed since the last clean run), but I did notice that my
>>>>>> libibverbs package was updated just prior to the breakage. I haven't
>>>>>> had the time to dig into the library code, but I expect that to be the
>>>>>> source of the problem.
>>>>> Just to be clear, I don't believe this breakage is limited to the test
>>>>> suite, I expect any users of the SELinux IB hooks will run into this
>>>>> problem. I believe we need to update the upstream and distro
>>>>> policies.
>>>> A ping to bring this issue back to the top of the mailing list.
>>>
>>> Hi Paul, I looked in the libraries and don't see explicit use of mlock. Maybe there was a change to use that access control for get_user_pages? That doesn't really jive with previously working kernels no longer working though.
>>
>> It would be useful to see the audit messages for that ipc_lock denial,
>> including the SYSCALL record.
>>
>> There are a number of kernel operations that can trigger ipc_lock checks,
>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/ident/CAP_IPC_LOCK
>>
>> Several of those are infiniband-specific.
>
> Hi all,
>
> Sorry for the delay in responding. Here is what I see when running
> the infiniband_pkey test on a current Fedora Rawhide system (run
> individually to capture the output):
>
> 1..4
> # Running under perl version 5.030000 for linux
> # Current time local: Wed Sep 4 18:24:39 2019
> # Current time GMT: Wed Sep 4 22:24:39 2019
> # Using Test.pm version 1.31
> ok 1
> Unable to create cq.
> not ok 2
> # Test 2 got: "256" (./test at line 50)
> # Expected: "0"
> # ./test line 50 is: ok( $result, 0 );
> Unable to create cq.
> not ok 3
> # Test 3 got: "1" (./test at line 71)
> # Expected: "13"
> # ./test line 71 is: if (@unlabeled_pkeys) {
> ok 4
>
> ... and I see the following AVCs:
>
> type=AVC msg=audit(1567635879.312:15018): avc: denied { ipc_lock } for
> pid=15726 comm="create_modify_q" capability=14
> scontext=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:test_ibpkey_access_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
> tcontext=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:test_ibpkey_access_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
> tclass=capability permissive=0
> type=AVC msg=audit(1567635884.022:15020): avc: denied { ipc_lock } for
> pid=15732 comm="create_modify_q" capability=14
> scontext=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:test_ibpkey_access_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
> tcontext=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:test_ibpkey_access_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
> tclass=capability permissive=0
>
> If I apply the workaround patch I mentioned earlier, the test succeeds
> and the only AVC is a infiniband_pkey:access denial (which is expected
> given the test).
I don't suppose you have SYSCALL (and possibly other auxiliary) audit
records from those denials?
Trying to figure out what system call triggered the CAP_IPC_LOCK check.